Disasters cost PHL over PHP 1 trillion in 16 years

ILOILO CITY — The Philippines’ high exposure to disasters has translated into more than PHP 1 trillion in losses and damages over 16 years, with the Bicol, Central Visayas, and Eastern Visayas regions accounting for the highest recorded figures.

Maria Antonia “Toni” Yulo-Loyzaga, special envoy for disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM), disclosed the figures at the Iloilo City government’s Scientific Forum on Sept. 29, citing data from the Office of Civil Defense (OCD).

“The loss and damage from natural and human-induced disasters from 2009 to 2024 amounted to over PHP 1 trillion, with Regions V, VII, and VIII topping the list,” she said.

She noted that the total losses and damages recorded by the OCD may differ from the economic impact figures kept by the National Economic and Development Authority, now the Department of Economy, Planning, and Development.

Yulo-Loyzaga, who served as secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources from 2022 to 2025, now leads the government’s disaster risk reduction advocacy as special envoy.

The Philippines has consistently ranked among the countries at highest risk from disasters, topping the global WorldRiskIndex in recent years.

Yulo-Loyzaga said the damage the country has incurred underscores the need to strengthen disaster risk reduction measures.

“Beyond the indices we are constantly reminded of, I choose to refer to the loss and damage figures that are available at the Office of Civil Defense as a metric of how disasters are impacting our lives and the need in terms of disaster risk reduction,” she said.

Citing estimates under the National Adaptation Plan, she said the country is expected to need between PHP 1.2 trillion and PHP 1.4 trillion in the 2030s to adapt to the impacts of climate change.

Complex, shared governance failures

Yulo-Loyzaga said development decisions made over time also shape disaster risks, stressing that responsibility cannot simply be attributed to a single person, agency, or administration.

“Disasters have happened due to development choices we, some leaders and some stakeholders, have made or not made along the way. This is true of choices well beyond the last 15 years,” she said.

She cautioned against reducing disaster narratives to blame directed at only a few individuals. She said disaster governance is a multidimensional process involving the public and private sectors, academia, and communities.

“There are political entrepreneurs who would try to sway the disaster narrative and attribute blame solely to one, two, or three decision-makers or bad actors. This approach removes both agency and accountability from them and from all of us,” she said.

“We who are in the public and private sectors, in academia, and those in communities themselves are inextricably part of decisions which determined what was right and what was needed in the crucial times when a hazard could have been prevented from becoming a disaster, and certainly what has come after that,” she added.

Whole-of-government, whole-of-society approach

The DRRM envoy said evidence-informed planning for resilience must involve a “whole-of-government” approach, with coordination among national agencies and local government offices.

She also called for a “whole-of-society” approach that considers community and sectoral interests and weighs immediate, medium-term, and long-term priorities.

“These choices are ultimately political decisions made by those elected and selected to represent not just people and the economy, but nature, which is at the very foundation of both human and resilient development,” she said.

She identified five key considerations for public-private-people partnerships amid increasingly complex and interconnected risks.

First, she said risks are changing faster than systems are adapting. Disaster planning must therefore account not only for complexity but also for the speed and interconnectedness of emerging threats.

Second, she highlighted the need for science, technology, and innovation. She cited transdisciplinary approaches, geospatial intelligence, and advanced analytics in particular, to identify threats to people, nature, food, water, energy, and critical infrastructure.

Third, she emphasized the role of the private sector, higher education institutions, research organizations, and international development partners in advancing science, engineering, technology, and innovation for resilience.

Private enterprises provide essential services such as power and water, while higher education institutions serve as centers for knowledge creation and innovation, she said.

She added that development partners provide funding and technical expertise that can help shape development strategies.

Yulo-Loyzaga said communities ultimately bear the greatest burden when knowledge, resources, and risk governance fail to work together.

“We often speak of vulnerability and social resilience. These are truly at the core of climate and disaster risk governance,” she said.

She described vulnerability as intersectional, noting that factors such as age, race, income, gender, and disability can interact with exposure to multiple hazards and shocks.

She also pointed to the interconnectedness of critical infrastructure, where the failure of one system can trigger cascading disruptions across other systems.

“When multiple life and income-sustaining systems fail, it is the socially vulnerable communities who suffer the most, marginalizing them even further,” she said.